DOCSLIB.ORG

Anarchist FAQ Review

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Anarchist FAQ Review An Anarchist FAQ Review Jon Bekken 2013 Iain McKay, An Anarchist FAQ Volume 1 (AK Press, 2008), 555 pages, $25 paper. Volume 2 (AK Press, 2012), 561 pages, $25 paper. This two-volume compilation includes the great bulk of the material assembled online inthe Anarchist FAQ by ASR contributor Iain McKay and other comrades over more than a decade. Established to confront misrepresentations of anarchism that have proliferated particularly in the online universe (allegedly anarchist tendencies exist there that have no apparent manifestation in the material world in which the rest of us live), AFAQ quickly evolved into a much broader overview of anarchism, as a social movement and as a set of ideas. It is impossible to do justice to the 1,136 pages in these two volumes. Volume 1 opens (after three introductions which explain the origins and evolution of the project) with an overview of anarchism, followed by sections explaining why anarchists oppose hierarchy, capitalism and the state; summarizing the anarchist critique of capitalist economics; reviewing how statism and capitalism operate as an intertwined system of exploitation and oppression; offering an anarchist analysis of the ecological crisis, and refuting the notion that there could be some sort of “anarcho”- capitalism. An appendix reviews the origins of three major anarchist symbols: the black flag, the red-and-black flag and the circled A. Volume 2 opens with a survey of individualist anarchism, which remains implacably hostile to capitalism despite its differences with the social anarchism embraced by most anarchists; followed by an explanation of why anarchists (who McKay rightly insists are part of the broader socialist movement) reject state socialism; an overview of anarchist thinking about the shape of a future, free society; a section addressing contemporary anarchist practice (involvement in social struggles, direct action, organizational approaches, alternative social organizations, child rearing, and social revolution); followed by a brief bibliography. Each major section is divided into smaller sections and subsections (presented in question form and using an outline numbering system that probably works better online) addressing specific aspects of the topic. The writing and organization are clear, if rarely captivating, and thetone is reasoned and constructive. However, at times, McKay does show his exasperation with the persistent misrepresentations of the Marxists and the “anarcho”-capitalists (who, as he rightly points out, have nothing whatsoever to do with anarchism and receive attention here far out of proportion to their actual significance in the world in large part because of their early adoption of and highly vocal presence on the Internet). Evidently, the ravings of the “anarcho”-primitivists have received less attention online and so they pass unmentioned here. As the book is devoted to political and social thought and action, there is also virtually no attention given to anarchist tendencies in art and literature, or to the post-modern “anarchisms” which dominate so much academic publishing on the subject of late. McKay and his fellow contributors give serious consideration even to anarchist tendencies with which they clearly disagree. Thus, platformism, syndicalism and synthesis all receive re- spectful treatment, presenting the arguments proffered for and against. Thus, Bookchin’s liber- tarian municipalism is presented on its own terms before a short critical assessment (1092–93). (This tolerant policy can extend too far, as with the citations to the notorious police informerBob Black, who can evidently be excerpted to make it appear as if he has a coherent social analysis, though nothing could be further from the truth.) Here and throughout the two volumes there is heavy reliance on direct quotations. The FAQ draws upon and tends to synthesize a widear- ray of (primarily anarchist) sources, in keeping with its broader mission of presenting a broad anarchist approach to a general public, rather than exploring differences within the movement or advocating for a particular school of thought. The emphasis is definitely upon the classics of anarchist thought, but McKay and his contributors have read widely and include citations not only to anarchist writers but also to social scientists and historians whose work tends (whether intended to or not) to bolster the anarchist position. By way of summation, and to give a bit of the flavor of the whole, I will briefly discuss Section I: What would an anarchist society look like? This 168-page section is broken up into subsections on libertarian socialism, a discussion of the balance between the insanity of drafting blueprints for the future and thinking about the sort of society we wish to build, considerations of the structural aspects of an anarchist economy and an anarchist society, consideration of how an anarchist economy might function, a review of the Spanish Revolution as an example of anar- chism in practice (if also under severe constraints), and short discussions of the balance between individualism and society and the so-called Tragedy of the Commons. This is a lot of terrain to cover, but the questions are essential. McKay’s discussion isgrounded in the classics, and (correctly) presuppose that anarchism represents a particular strand of social- ism, quoting Bakunin: We are convinced that freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, and that socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality. (839) The text then methodically establishes the necessity of socialism, the practicality of ourvision, explains why any lover of freedom must reject markets, and refutes the absurd (but oft-preached) notion that capitalism distributes social resources efficiently. And that’s just the first 30 pages. The section refutes mainstream economists’ critiques of self-management (critiques basednot on examining actual practice but rather on mental exercises based on assumptions that nowhere exist), and reviews the long history of self-management in practice. However, as McKay argues, social ownership of the means of life, and of production, is es- sential to any meaningful freedom. While anarchists have advocated for different methods for distributing the product of our necessarily social labor, and hence for different systems for orga- nizing the economy, all anarchist visions are necessarily based upon social ownership and free access to the means of production. McKay explores the ways in which overlapping federations of syndicates and associations (most organized for specific purposes, as anarchists have generally 2 been skeptical of schemes which try to centralize the entire sphere of human life into a single, totalized organization) can cooperate to meet the incredibly varied range of human needs and desires. Throughout, McKay raises and refutes the objections we have all heard a thousand times,not only theoretically but with extensive examples from real life (something far more congenial to an- archist theory than to the doctrines of either the capitalists or the state socialists). Anarchism, he shows (like Kropotkin and Dolgoff before) offers an eminently practical approach ideally suited to coordinating large, complex societies. My main objection to this section is the part where McKay suggests (to quote the title) that “anarchists desire to abolish work.” In the actual text, he is more clear, noting that Work (in the sense of doing necessary things or productive activity) will always be with us. There is no getting away from it; crops need to be grown, schools built, homes fixed, and so on. No, work in this context means any form of labor inwhich the worker does not control his or her own activity. But what purpose is served by using commonly understood terms such as “work” in so tech- nical a way? It must necessarily lead to confusion, on the one hand, and on the other enable charlatans such as the aforementioned Bob Black to sneak their obfuscations into the anarchist camp. Far better to speak of wage slavery, or, as Chomsky often does, to authoritarianism inthe economic sphere. Far too much of our labor is of course wasted under present arrangements, and our workplaces are sites of subjugation and misery. In an economy controlled by workers and organized around meeting human needs, we could soon slash the work week to 16 hour or less, reorganize work- places to make them both safer and more fulfilling, abolish the ruthless division of labor that has some think and others serving as the minions of those who decide, and redirect the entire sphere of production in fundamental ways. This would transform our relation to our work, as well to the products of our labor. But while we might well take genuine pleasure from joining with our fellow workers to fulfill our needs and our desires, not all work will be pleasurable inandof itself, as is suggested here. Anarchists have not come to agreement as to how production will be coordinated and social priorities decided upon, and so McKay leaves these questions open (while discussing some of the leading proposals). This is an issue ASR has been exploring in our series on anarchist economics, and which I suspect is at the root of the otherwise inexplicable attraction many feel to the Parecon scheme. Personally, I find Kropotkin’s treatment of these issues more compelling, even if itis a century old. AFAQ does effectively integrate the experience of the Spanish Revolution (also presented in a well-crafted 31-page section that concludes this chapter) into the discussion. Butin general, I fear the pluralistic approach embraced in this treatment – while capturing the diversity of the movement – undermines the coherence of the argument, as well as eliding the congruence between our broader social visions and the means we advocate that is one of the unique strengths of the anarcho-syndicalist approach. In short, McKay and his fellow contributors have made a substantial contribution in creating and maintaining the online introduction to anarchism, and refutation of the endless objections of those who can not conceive of a society free of oppression and exploitation.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Anarcho-Communists, Platformism, and Dual Power Innovation Or Travesty?
    The Anarchist Library (Mirror) Anti-Copyright Anarcho-Communists, Platformism, and Dual Power Innovation or Travesty? Lawrence Jarach Lawrence Jarach Anarcho-Communists, Platformism, and Dual Power Innovation or Travesty? www.geocities.com from Anarchy: A Journal of Desire Armed usa.anarchistlibraries.net power discourse is concerned with government, with how to cre- ate and maintain a set of institutions that can pull the allegiance of the governed away from the existing state. Unless the partisans of dual power have worked out a radically different understand- ing of what power is, where its legitimacy comes from, how it is Contents maintained, and — more importantly — how anarchists can possi- bly exercise it within a framework that is historically statist, the discussion of “anarchist dual power” is a mockery of the anarchist What is “anarchist dual power”? .............. 8 principle of being against government. Love & Rage and the influence and legacy of Leninism . 13 18 3 rity, a curio from anarchist history, something to titillate the trivia- minded. What made it worth rediscovering? The anarcho-communism of the Platformists is eerily similar to the authoritarian communism of various Leninist gangs. From a cursory examination of their published rhetoric, it is difficult not to conclude that they have taken the “successful” aspects of a Lenin- ist program, a Leninist vision, and Lenino-Maoist organizing, and more or less removed or modified the vocabulary of the more ob- viously statist parts. The promoters of this hybridized anarchism — should it be called anarcho-Leninism? — draw on the Platform the same way that the writers of the Platform drew on Leninism.
    [Show full text]
  • Anarchist Movements in Tampico & the Huaste
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Peripheries of Power, Centers of Resistance: Anarchist Movements in Tampico & the Huasteca Region, 1910-1945 A Thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts in Latin American Studies (History) by Kevan Antonio Aguilar Committee in Charge: Professor Christine Hunefeldt, Co-Chair Professor Michael Monteon, Co-Chair Professor Max Parra Professor Eric Van Young 2014 The Thesis of Kevan Antonio Aguilar is approved and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: Co-Chair Co-Chair University of California, San Diego 2014 iii DEDICATION: For my grandfather, Teodoro Aguilar, who taught me to love history and to remember where I came from. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Signature Page……………………………………………………………..…………..…iii Dedication……………………………………………………………………………...…iv Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………….v List of Figures………………………………………………………………………….…vi Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………vii Abstract of the Thesis…………………………………………………………………….xi Introduction……………………………………………………………………………......1 Chapter 1: Geography & Peripheral Anarchism in the Huasteca Region, 1860-1917…………………………………………………………….10 Chapter 2: Anarchist Responses to Post-Revolutionary State Formations, 1918-1930…………………………………………………………….60 Chapter 3: Crisis & the Networks of Revolution: Regional Shifts towards International Solidarity Movements, 1931-1945………………95 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………….......126 Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………129 v LIST
    [Show full text]
  • Nestor Makhno and Rural Anarchism in Ukraine, 1917–21 Nestor Makhno and Rural Anarchism in Ukraine, 1917–21
    Nestor Makhno and Rural Anarchism in Ukraine, 1917–21 Nestor Makhno and Rural Anarchism in Ukraine, 1917–21 Colin Darch First published 2020 by Pluto Press 345 Archway Road, London N6 5AA www.plutobooks.com Copyright © Colin Darch 2020 The right of Colin Darch to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 978 0 7453 3888 0 Hardback ISBN 978 0 7453 3887 3 Paperback ISBN 978 1 7868 0526 3 PDF eBook ISBN 978 1 7868 0528 7 Kindle eBook ISBN 978 1 7868 0527 0 EPUB eBook Typeset by Stanford DTP Services, Northampton, England For my grandchildren Historia scribitur ad narrandum, non ad probandum – Quintilian Contents List of Maps viii List of Abbreviations ix Acknowledgements x 1. The Deep Roots of Rural Discontent: Guliaipole, 1905–17 1 2. The Turning Point: Organising Resistance to the German Invasion, 1918 20 3. Brigade Commander and Partisan: Makhno’s Campaigns against Denikin, January–May 1919 39 4. Betrayal in the Heat of Battle? The Red–Black Alliance Falls Apart, May–September 1919 54 5. The Long March West and the Battle at Peregonovka 73 6. Red versus White, Red versus Green: The Bolsheviks Assert Control 91 7. The Last Act: Alliance at Starobel’sk, Wrangel’s Defeat, and Betrayal at Perekop 108 8. The Bitter Politics of the Long Exile: Romania, Poland, Germany, and France, 1921–34 128 9.
    [Show full text]
  • Anarchist Organisation Not Leninist Vanguardism
    Wayne Price Anarchist Organisation not Leninist Vanguardism 2006 The Anarchist Library Contents Why an Anarchist Organization is Needed. But Not a “Van- guard Party”.............................. 3 The Anarchist Revolutionary Political Organization...... 4 The Leninist Party.......................... 7 The Myth of the Bolshevik Revolution.............. 9 Conclusion............................... 10 References ............................... 11 2 Why an Anarchist Organization is Needed. But Not a “Vanguard Party” Right now only a few people are revolutionary anarchists. The big majority of people reject anarchism and any kind of radicalism (if they think about it at all). For those of us who are anarchists, a key question concerns the relationship between the revolutionary minority (us) and the moderate and (as- yet) nonrevolutionary majority. Shall the revolutionary minority wait for the laws of the Historical Process to cause the majority (at least of the working class) to become revolutionary, as some propose? In that case, the minority really does not have to do anything. Or does the minority of radicals have to organize itself in order to spread its liberatory ideas, in cooperation with the historical process? If so, should the revolutionary minority organize itself in a top-down, centralized, fashion, or can it organize itself as a radically democratic federation, consistent with its goal of freedom? Perhaps the most exciting tendency on the left today is the growth of pro-organizational, class struggle, anarchism. This includes international Plat- formism, Latin American especifismo, and other elements (Platformism is in- spired by the 1926 Organizational Platform of the General Union of Anarchists; in Skirda, 2002). Even some Trotskyists have noticed, “ ‘Platformism’ [is] one of the more left-wing currents within contemporary anarchism.
    [Show full text]
  • FAQ of „Die Plattform“ – Frequently Asked Questions About Our Initiative and Our Attempts to Anwer Them
    FAQ of „die plattform“ – Frequently asked questions about our initiative and our attempts to anwer them Originally published in German in June 2020, as part of the anarcha-communist publication series „Kollektive Einmischung“. Translated by Peter Brandt, member of die plattform. Introduction Although platformism (or its Latin American variant, Especifismo) plays an important role worldwide as an anarchist current, it has no significant tradition in the German-speaking region - neither theoretically nor organisationally1. So there was no question of it being broadly based in the anarchist movement - on the contrary, we suspected that a larger part of the anarchists in our region had not yet dealt with platformism or had not dealt with it in depth. Others rejected the concept for various reasons. When we launched „die platform“ in early 2019, an organisation based on platformist or especifist organisational concepts, we had to deal with this lack of anchoring. In order to spread the idea and get into conversation with people who had reservations, online public relations, texts and interviews in anarchist media outlets and open meetings on site were not enough. Therefore, we wanted to introduce the concept of platformism and our organisation with a large-scale presentation tour in the German-speaking countries and thus also put it up for discussion. In the end, we held more than 30 events were we presented our initiative between April 2019 and the beginning of 2020 and were able to reach almost 600 people. This enabled us to cover all regions in Germany (with a few exceptions). Unfortunately, we did not succeed in doing so in Switzerland (with only 2 events) and above all in Austria (no event so far).
    [Show full text]
  • Libertarian Socialism
    Libertarian Socialism PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See http://code.pediapress.com/ for more information. PDF generated at: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 19:52:27 UTC Contents Articles Libertarian socialism 1 The Venus Project 37 The Zeitgeist Movement 39 References Article Sources and Contributors 42 Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors 43 Article Licenses License 44 Libertarian socialism 1 Libertarian socialism Libertarian socialism (sometimes called social anarchism,[1][2] and sometimes left libertarianism)[3][4] is a group of political philosophies that promote a non-hierarchical, non-bureaucratic society without private property in the means of production. Libertarian socialists believe in converting present-day private productive property into the commons or public goods, while retaining respect for personal property[5]. Libertarian socialism is opposed to coercive forms of social organization. It promotes free association in place of government and opposes the social relations of capitalism, such as wage labor.[6] The term libertarian socialism is used by some socialists to differentiate their philosophy from state socialism[7][8] or by some as a synonym for left anarchism.[1][2][9] Adherents of libertarian socialism assert that a society based on freedom and equality can be achieved through abolishing authoritarian institutions that control certain means of production and subordinate the majority to an owning class or political and economic elite.[10] Libertarian socialism also constitutes a tendency of thought that
    [Show full text]
  • INVENTING the FUTURE Postcapitalism and a World Without Work Nick Srnicek and Alex Williams
    INVENTING THE FUTURE Postcapitalism and a World Without Work Nick Srnicek and Alex Williams First published by Verso 2015 1 Contents Introduction 1.Our Political Common Sense: Introducing Folk Politics 2.Why Aren’t We Winning? A Critique of Today’s Left 3.Why Are They Winning? The Making of Neoliberal Hegemony 4.Left Modernity 5.The Future Isn’t Working 6.Post-Work Imaginaries 7.A New Common Sense 8.Building Power Conclusion Notes Introduction Where did the future go? For much of the twentieth century, the future held sway over our dreams. On the horizons of the political left a vast assortment of emancipatory visions gathered, often springing from the conjunction of popular political power and the liberating potential of technology. From predictions of new worlds of leisure, to Soviet-era cosmic communism, to afro-futurist celebrations of the synthetic and diasporic nature of black culture, to post-gender dreams of radical feminism, the popular imagination of the left envisaged societies vastly superior to anything we dream of today.1 Through popular political control of new technologies, we would collectively transform our world for the better. Today, on one level, these dreams appear closer than ever. The technological infrastructure of the twenty-first century is producing the resources by which a very different political and economic system could be achieved. Machines are accomplishing tasks that were unimaginable a decade ago. The internet and social media are giving a voice to billions who previously went unheard, bringing global participative democracy closer than ever to existence. Open-source designs, copyleft creativity, and 3D printing all portend a world where the scarcity of many products might be overcome.
    [Show full text]
  • 288381679.Pdf
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Loughborough University Institutional Repository This item was submitted to Loughborough University as a PhD thesis by the author and is made available in the Institutional Repository (https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/) under the following Creative Commons Licence conditions. For the full text of this licence, please go to: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ Towards a Libertarian Communism: A Conceptual History of the Intersections between Anarchisms and Marxisms By Saku Pinta Loughborough University Submitted to the Department of Politics, History and International Relations in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) Approximate word count: 102 000 1. CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY This is to certify that I am responsible for the work submitted in this thesis, that the original work is my own except as specified in acknowledgments or in footnotes, and that neither the thesis nor the original work contained therein has been submitted to this or any other institution for a degree. ……………………………………………. ( Signed ) ……………………………………………. ( Date) 2 2. Thesis Access Form Copy No …………...……………………. Location ………………………………………………….……………...… Author …………...………………………………………………………………………………………………..……. Title …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Status of access OPEN / RESTRICTED / CONFIDENTIAL Moratorium Period :…………………………………years, ending…………../…………20………………………. Conditions of access approved by (CAPITALS):…………………………………………………………………… Supervisor (Signature)………………………………………………...…………………………………... Department of ……………………………………………………………………...………………………………… Author's Declaration : I agree the following conditions: Open access work shall be made available (in the University and externally) and reproduced as necessary at the discretion of the University Librarian or Head of Department. It may also be digitised by the British Library and made freely available on the Internet to registered users of the EThOS service subject to the EThOS supply agreements.
    [Show full text]
  • Anarcho-Communists, Platformism, and Dual Power Innovation Or Travesty?
    Anarcho-Communists, Platformism, and Dual Power Innovation or Travesty? Lawrence Jarach Contents What is “anarchist dual power”? .............................. 4 Love & Rage and the influence and legacy of Leninism .................. 7 2 “…When a revolutionary situation develops, counter-institutions have the potential of functioning as a real alternative to the existing structure and reliance on them becomes as normal as reliance on the old authoritarian institutions. This is when counter-institutions constitute dual power. Dual power is a state of affairs in which people have created institutions that fulfill all the useful functions formerly provided by the state. The creation of a general state of dual power is a necessary requirement for a successful revolution…” — Love & Rage Revolutionary Anarchist Federation New York Local Member Handbook; June, 1997 “…What we need is a theory of the state that starts with an empirical investigation of the origins of the state, the state as it actually exists today, the various experiences of revolutionary dual power, and post-revolutionary societies…” — After Winter Must Come Spring: a Self-Critical Evaluation of the Life andDeathof the Love and Rage Revolutionary Anarchist Federation (New York); 2000 “…A revolutionary strategy seeks to undermine the state by developing a dual power strategy. A dual power strategy is one that directly challenges institutions of power and at the same time, in some way, prefigures the new institutions we envision. A dual power strategy not only opposes the state,
    [Show full text]
  • Anarchism in Four Parts (Video Series Transcript)
    The Anarchist Library (Mirror) Anti-Copyright Anarchism In Four Parts (Video Series Transcript) Libertarian Socialist Rants Libertarian Socialist Rants Anarchism In Four Parts (Video Series Transcript) 2013 usa.anarchistlibraries.net 2013 Contents The Case Against Hierarchy ................ 5 Capitalism ....................... 6 The State ........................ 8 White Supremacy, Cisheteropatriarchy, and Ableism 9 Concluding Thoughts . 12 The Case For Liberty ..................... 13 Socialism ........................ 14 Statelessness ...................... 16 Intersectional feminism, disability accommo- dation, liberation of oppressed racial groups ..................... 18 Concluding Thoughts . 20 The Case for Revolution ................... 21 Prefiguration and Anarchist Organisations . 21 Direct Action and the Culture of Resistance . 23 Social Revolution ................... 26 Internationalism .................... 28 Concluding Thoughts . 28 Arguments Against Anarchism . 29 3 “The materialistic, realistic, and collectivist concep- tion of freedom, as opposed to the idealistic, is this: Man becomes conscious of himself and his humanity only in society and only by the collective action of the whole society. He frees himself from the yoke of external nature only by collective and social labor, which alone can transform the earth into an abode favorable to the development of humanity. Without such material emancipation the intellectual and moral emancipation of the individual is impossible.” We can of course disregard Bakunin’s typical
    [Show full text]
  • As Far As Organization Goes: We Are Platformists
    As Far As Organization Goes: We Are Platformists Nicolas Phebus 2001 Contents The Dielo Trouda Group and the Platform ......................... 3 The Relevance of the Platform Today ............................ 6 2 In Quebec, and more generally in North America, anarchism and organization have notbeen coupled well. Indeed, the last serious attempt to build a political anarchist group in North America date’s back to the adventure of the Love and Rage Revolutionary Anarchist Federation1. However, there have been, and there still are, organized anarchists around the world. Gener- ations of activists worked hard on the question of organization, and, for those of us who don’t want to reinvent the wheel, it is useful to look at their analysis and proposals. Even if we find good things in ‘classical’ anarchists like Errico Malatesta and Michael Bakunin, we at NEFAC are mainly influenced by a tradition called, for lack of a better word, ‘platformism’. The Dielo Trouda Group and the Platform The ‘plaformist’ tradition started with the analysis of the anarchist defeat at the handsof the Bolsheviks during the civil war made by a group of Russian anarchists in exile. This group included such important figures as Nestor Makhno, one of the main leaders of the insurrectional army of the Ukrainian peasantry, Peter Arshinov, historian of the same movement and old friend of Makhno, and Ida Mett, passionate partisan and historian of the Kronstadt insurrection2. Based in Paris, the group was organized around the publication of an anarcho-communist magazine in Russian, called Dielo Trouda (Worker’s Cause), a project originally conceived of by Arshinov and Makhno while they were rotting in the czarist prison some fifteen years earlier whichwas finally founded in Paris in 1925.
    [Show full text]
  • The Two Main Trends in Anarchism
    Wayne Price The Two Main Trends in Anarchism 2009 The Anarchist Library Contents Alternate Tendencies of Anarchism................ 3 The Broad Anarchist Tradition .................. 4 Political Differences between the Two Trends: On Revolution4 Political Differences: On Class................... 6 Bookchin and Other Differences.................. 6 References............................... 7 2 Alternate Tendencies of Anarchism Uri Gordon (2008). Anarchy Alive! Michael Schmidt & Lucien van der Walt (2009). Black Flame. It has been stated by various theorists that there are two main trends in modern anarchism. How they are conceptualized varies with the writer. I will state how I see the two broad tendencies in the anarchist movement, using the above two books to illustrate the two trends (this is particularly not a review of Black Flame). I will describe them as differing on the issues of revolution or reformism, of democracy, of what “prefigurative politics” mean, and of attitudes toward the working class. Near the beginning of a recent book on anarchism by Uri Gordon (2008), an Israeli anarchist, the author discusses the “most prominent division” among anarchists. He starts with the way this was framed by David Graeber (2002) of the U.S. as between “a minority tendency of ‘sectarian’ or ‘capital-A anarchist groups,’ ” which have developed, dogmatic, political programs, and “a majority tendency of ‘small-a anarchists’. who ‘are the real locus of historical dynamism right now’ ” and who are much looser programmatically (Gordon 2008; p.23–24; for my views on Graeber’s anarchism, see Price 2007). The only group Grae- ber referred to as sectarian, dogmatic, big-A, anarchist, was the Northeastern Federation of Anarchist-Communists (I am a member of NEFAC, but not an official spokesperson).
    [Show full text]